On 27 January 2016 at 15:26, Johannes Berg <johan...@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 15:26 +0100, Michal Kazior wrote:
>>
>> @@ -1294,6 +1298,8 @@ struct sk_buff *ieee80211_tx_dequeue(struct
>> ieee80211_hw *hw,
>>       if (!skb)
>>               goto out;
>>
>> +     txqi->byte_cnt -= skb->len;
>> +
>>       atomic_dec(&sdata->txqs_len[ac]);
>>
> This *looks* a bit worrying - you have an atomic dec for the # of
> packets and a non-atomic one for the bytes.
>
> You probably thought about it and I guess it's fine, but can you
> explain it?

The atomic was used because it accesses per-vif counters. You can't
use txqi->queue.lock for that.

On the other hand byte_cnt is per txqi and it was very easy to make
use of the txqi->queue.lock (which was already acquired in both drv_tx
and tx_dequeue functions). Using atomic* for byte_cnt would be
wasteful a bit.


MichaƂ
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to